Microsoft Corp. v. Franchise Tax Board

Caution
2006 Cal. LEXIS 9522·2006 Daily Journal DAR 10843·39 Cal. 4th 750·47 Cal. Rptr. 3d 216·139 P.3d 1169
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 17, 2006S133343California8,116 words

Opinion

Opinion

Werdegar, J.

Ours is a global economy. In contrast, government and the taxing authority used to fund it are national and local. This geographic disparity generates difficulties when each jurisdiction seeks its piece of the economic pie, a pie generated by economic activity that knows no borders.

The Uniform Division of Income for Tax Purposes Act (UDITPA) attempts to address these problems and fairly assess corporate taxes. Adopted by the District of Columbia and 22 states, including California, it seeks to establish uniform rules for the attribution of corporate income, rules that in theory will result in an equitable taxation scheme—equitable to each jurisdiction, seeking its own fair share, and equitable to the taxpayer, who in the absence of uniform rules faces the prospect of having the same income taxed by two, three, or more different states.

The UDITPA’s application is not always clear. This case requires us to resolve how the UDITPA should apply to income arising from the redemption of marketable securities, a critical aspect of the operations of the treasury departments of many large corporations, including plaintiff Microsoft Corporation (Microsoft). We conclude (1) the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.